Seen on a meme: “Truth doesn’t mind being questioned – A lie does not like being challenged.”

If you decide to take the Oneness Challenge, while you are studying and looking up scriptures, you may want to tackle answering the following questions as well. They may seem to be a bit repetitive, but they are meant to capture different details. These questions demonstrate the serious absence of biblical statements of expression and explanation of the Oneness view in the Bible. This is a serious allegation being as the scripture teaches that it “thoroughly furnishes us unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:17), and says, “command…men not to teach a different doctrine (1 Timothy 1:3) and to “learn not to think beyond the things which are written ” (1 Corinthians 4:6).

1. If the Oneness view was as critical, exciting, and prominent with the apostles as it is with modern Onenessians, why did the apostles consistently name, proclaim, confess, and explain something different than the Oneness doctrine in the New Testament scriptures?

2. Similarly, why, in order to teach the Oneness doctrine, does the Bible need to be interpreted the way the devil interprets (proof texting, jumping to conclusions, creating false dilemmas, and negating what is named, proclaimed, confessed, and explained) in order to describe the distinctive elements of the Oneness doctrine? Are we to believe the devil’s method of interpretation, which method sunk mankind into death and sin, is the way to arrive at truth?

3. If proof-texting, jumping to conclusions, and creating false dilemmas to establish a doctrine that is not stated in the Bible is wrong for Trinitarians to do to come up with the distinct teachings of their unbiblical doctrine, why is it okay for Onenessians to use that same method but just come to a different set of unbiblically stated conclusions?

4. If the Oneness doctrine cannot be shown to be Named, Proclaimed, Confessed, AND Explained in the Bible, how much less biblical would a doctrine have to be to “prove” to you personally that it isn’t biblical (when in fact the “son of God” doctrine, which is different than the Oneness doctrine, is Named, Proclaimed, Confessed, AND Explained in the Bible)?

5. If the Oneness understanding of God is true, how come we never read in the Book of Acts, any verbatim teaching that Jesus is GOD? And why did they never preach (openly proclaim) that believing Jesus is God come to earth in the form of man is essential for salvation?

6. Why did Paul not say that Jesus is God when proclaiming the UNKNOWN GOD at Mars Hill (Acts 17)?

7. When the Lycaonians proclaimed in Acts 14:11 that the gods have come down to us in the likeness of men; why did the Apostles not respond that only One God has done so, and his name is Jesus?”

8. If the Oneness understanding of God is true, and Jesus himself is the true God, then why did God have to “give” the revelation of himself to himself in Revelation 1:1 after Jesus was glorified? Did God not have the Revelation of himself before he gave it to himself as was the case with the angel and John?

9. If the Oneness understanding of God is true, then why does Jesus, well after his resurrection and glorification, continue to say that he has a God (Revelation 1:6 & 3:12)? Can true God have a true God above him? Where will that end?

10. If the Oneness understanding of God is true, then if GOD is seated on the throne in Rev Chapter 4; who is the Lamb that is taking the scroll out of GOD’s right hand in Chapter 5? There is only one God! Don’t Onenessians contend with Trinitarians that when the first commandment says “God is one” it doesn’t mean multiple persons within God?

11. On the Day of Pentecost, Peter filled with the Holy Spirit, proclaimed Jesus a man approved of GOD! How could Peter say that if he held to the Oneness view?

12. Why would Jesus proclaim someone other than himself as the only true God in John 17:3 if Jesus is indeed, God?

13. How could Jesus say he can do NOTHING of himself (John 5:19,30) if Jesus himself is God? Who has the anointing and authority to change the meaning of “self” to mean a different “nature” within one’s own personal self?

14. If the Oneness understanding of God is true, why does God call himself “alone” (i.e. Isaiah 37:16 & Isaiah 44:24) in the Old Testament (which Onenessians use to refute the Trinity of three persons), but when Jesus says that he is “not alone” (John 8:16; John 16:32) in the New Testament, that doesn’t mean, according to Onenessians, that Jesus and the Father are not personally different? Isn’t this a double standard on the Part of Onenessians like saying, “heads you lose, tails I win”?

15. If the Oneness understanding is true, why do 1 Corinthians 15:21-22 and Romans 5:12-19 say, respectively, “since death came by man, the resurrection of the dead also came by man” and “as sin entered into the world through one man, and death through sin… much more did the grace of God, and the gift by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, abound to the many… even so through the obedience of the one will many be made righteous”? Was Adam a “god-man” like Jesus is said to be according to the Oneness understanding? Do these passages, or any other in the whole Bible, teach that God had to become a man to do what man could not do, contrary to what these verses explicitly teach? Or do Oneness theologians claim to have the anointing and authority to change what these verses explain? Is there another option?

16. If the Oneness understanding is true, did God have to prove to himself how obedient he could be to himself as a human in order to exalt himself and give himself a name above every name (Philippians 2:5-12)? If what was really being explained in Philippians 2 was that Jesus was just being an example for us to follow, why does it not teach that, but does teach something different?

17. If the Oneness understanding is true, why does the Bible say “…that he himself has suffered being tempted… (Hebrews 2:14–18)” and again, “¹³…God can’t be tempted by evil, and he himself tempts no one (James 1:13–15)”? Was Jesus able to “forget” that he was really God while being himself tempted? Could Jesus be tempted to believe that He, God, doesn’t exist like a lot of people are tempted to believe? Are you ever tempted to believe that you don’t really exist? “¹⁵For we don’t have a high priest who can’t be touched with the feeling of our infirmities, but one who has been in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin” (Hebrews 4:15).

18. Why do Onenessians resort to a well-known corruption of scripture (“God was manifest in the flesh” 1 Timothy 3:16) to justify and affirm their view? If we don’t want to honor the corrupting of scripture, shouldn’t we reject corruptions rather than perpetuating and memorializing them?

19. How is trying to “prove” the “son of God” doctrine to Onenessians not like trying to “prove” to atheists that God exists and created us? “Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God…” (Hebrews 11:3), and “faith comes by hearing…the word of God” (Romans 10:17). Does quoting these scriptures “prove” the evidence of God and creation–in order to “make” atheists believe–or do they have to hear and believe in order to be convinced and persuaded? The latter, right? So, if we quote scripture to you, dear Onenessian, that names, proclaims, confesses, and explains the son of God doctrine, what is keeping you from believing it other than a lack of faith that comes from hearing the word of God just like the lack of faith that atheists have toward the word of God?

20. If God made Moses a “god” to Pharaoh, and God himself called the Israelite elders “gods” (John 10:35-36; Psalm 82:1,6), and other men were called “god” (el or elohim) in the Bible (i.e. Psalm 97:7, Exodus 21:6, 22:8-9, 28; Ezekiel 32:21; Job 41:25), why is it so incredible or unbelievable that a man who was born God’s son, who is greater than all of them put together, could be called “god” without him being “true God,” especially when Jesus himself said, speaking to his Father, “This is eternal life, that they should know you, the only true God, and him whom you sent, Jesus Christ” (John 17:3)? Why then is Jesus proof-texted by Onenessians to prove he is true God, but these other verses aren’t used to proof-text that these other men were also true God? Do Onenessians have double standards in how they interpret the Bible, or what?

21. If the Oneness understanding of Jesus is true, where does the Bible explain that “Father” means “deity,” and “son” means “flesh” in the singular personality named Jesus Christ? Does it help or hurt the Oneness that the earliest writer to mention the dual nature doctrine was Irenaeus when he called it “blasphemous” and accused the antichristian Gnostics of inventing it? “…blasphemous systems… divide the Lord… saying that he was formed of two different substances. For this reason also he has thus testified to us in his Epistle: “Little children, it is the last time; and as ye have heard that Antichrist doth come, now have many antichrists appeared…” -Irenaeus, Against Heresies, Book 3, Chapter 16, par. 5.

22. If after all you’ve read about jumping to conclusions, reasoning in your hearts, and creating false dilemmas, and teaching things about Jesus that are not so stated in the Bible, will you still jump to the conclusion that Jesus is a dual-natured individual who spoke sometimes from his human nature and other times from his deific nature? Wouldn’t that be putting the traditions of men above the word of God? “⁶He answered them, “Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, ‘This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me. ⁷ But in vain do they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’… ¹³making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down. You do many things like this.” (Mark 7:6–13)

23. If the Oneness understanding is true, why does 1 Corinthians 15:28 say the “son will also himself be subjected to him who subjected all things to him” if what that really means is that only Jesus’ human nature would be subject to his deific nature? If that is what was meant, why didn’t it just say that? Onenessians can articulate that idea, why doesn’t the Bible do so? The Bible does say, to “Command… men that they teach no other doctrine” (1 Timothy 1:3)

24. If the Oneness understanding is true, why didn’t Peter receive and confess the unique Oneness understanding when Jesus asked him who they thought he was in Matthew 16:15-16? Why didn’t Jesus build his assembly on a “Oneness” confession of faith instead of on the “Son of God” confession of faith?

25. If the Oneness understanding is true, why did John say it is antichrist to deny the Father and the Son? Is there any such thing as a father being a son to himself and a son being a father to himself at the same time in the same relationship? Wouldn’t that be confusion? Do Onenessian theologians have the anointing or the authority to change the meanings of the most basic and universally understood words, “father” and “son” so that they can claim John’s warning does not apply to them? How is that not circular reasoning? For example, “We interpret the son to be flesh and Father to be deity, so that we aren’t guilty of being antichrist.” Shouldn’t that be at least “concerning”?

26. If the Oneness understanding is true, why does the Bible say, in Hebrews 5:4-5, that no one, even Jesus, ordains or glorifies himself? Why doesn’t it say instead, here, or anywhere, that Christ was a mode of himself? How is the Oneness position not denying that Jesus is the “anointed one” (Christ), if the Bible says no one, even Christ, can ordain “himself”?

27. If the Oneness understanding is true, why doesn’t the scripture explain the details of their teaching the way they do since the Bible says, “¹⁶Every Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness, ¹⁷that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Timothy 3:16-17)? Do Onenessians have the anointing and authority to teach different doctrines than the Bible does, but the Trinitarians don’t? Isn’t that double standards?

28. If the Oneness response to these questions is, “The Oneness is a revelation and that’s why others don’t understand,” why did no one receive that unique revelation in the Bible? Why did Jesus build his assembly on a different “revelation” in Matthew 16:16-18?

29. Why is challenging the Oneness doctrine with these questions not a legitimate way of countering Oneness claims, but if Oneness raise questions against the “son of God” view, their questions alone are all the proof they need that the “son of God” view is the one in error?

30. Why are the words Jesus did say not what he meant; and what he meant to say, according to Onenessians, he was never quite able to say? Who is the word of God made flesh, him or Onenessians and their traditions of men which Jesus never articulated? For example, when Jesus said he was going to our Father and his Father, and to our God and His God (John 20:17), why didn’t he just plainly say his human nature was going to his deific nature if that’s what he meant according to Onenessians? Conversely, when he said, “He who has seen me has seen the Father.…I speak not from myself” (John 14:9-10), why didn’t he just plainly say he spoke from his human nature, if that is what he meant according to Onenessians? If Onenessians can articulate more precisely what Jesus meant than Jesus was able to do, who, then, is “the word of God” and the true witness, Jesus or Onenessian theologians?

The rest of this study can be summed up as time spent exploring and addressing this last question and its ramifications.

“²²For Moses indeed said to the fathers, ‘The Lord God will raise up a prophet for you from among your brothers, like me. You shall listen to him in all things whatever he says to you. ²³It will be, that every soul that will not listen to that prophet will be utterly destroyed…’” (Acts 3:22-23)

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have rejected knowledge, I will also reject you…” (Hosea 4:6)

“²⁹Isn’t my word like fire? says Yahweh; and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces? ³⁰Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, says Yahweh, who steal my words everyone from his neighbor. ³¹Behold, I am against the prophets, says Yahweh, who use their tongues, and say, He says. ³²Behold, I am against those who prophesy lying dreams, says Yahweh, and do tell them, and cause my people to err by their lies, and by their vain boasting: yet I didn’t send them, nor commanded them; neither do they profit this people at all, says Yahweh.” (Jeremiah 23:29-32)

“⁸Now go, write it before them on a tablet, and inscribe it in a book, that it may be for the time to come forever and ever. ⁹For it is a rebellious people, lying children, children who will not hear the law of Yahweh; ¹⁰ who tell the seers, ‘Don’t see!’ and to the prophets, ‘Don’t prophesy to us right things. Tell us pleasant things. Prophesy deceits…’” (Isaiah 30:8-14)

 Print This Post